NS2's Direction
SSLLAAYYAARR
Join Date: 2010-06-20 Member: 72108Members
Join Date: 2010-06-20 Member: 72108Members
Hey, I've decided to make my first and hopefully last post on these forums about NS2.
I don't want to sound like someone who doesn't appreciate the developers work, as Natural Selection is my favourite game, and one of the only 2 games I actually enjoy repetitively playing.
My biggest concern about NS2 is I'm worried the developers actually put thought into most of the completely stupid and ridiculous ideas on the forums which are visible in nearly every thread. I mean, the ideas are so bad that they are around 90% of the reason I wasted so long typing up this post.
I do not like the direction of NS2, don't get me wrong I accept the fact it has to be different from NS1, I just think you are limiting the game and that the idea's on these forums will cause damage to the potential of NS2.
Below is what I think sucks about NS2.
================================================================================
I think your map is too small, linear, symmetrical and is imbalanced (at least in NS1 standards). The rooms are too open, there isn't any real cover visible, there isn't many spots for skulks to ambush, the vents are all in dumb places and again, its too small.
Look at the good maps in NS1 compared to the bad maps. The best ns_ map in my opinion is ns_veil. The distances between marine start, all resource nodes, and hives is perfect. There are heaps of rooms and hallways that shape the map between RT's. Then there is say, ns_machina. This map isn't too terrible with RT/Hive/MS distances, but the walls and rooms are TERRIBLE (nearly as bad as co_kestral's MS, which is just like your tram maps MS). Aliens need corners, pillars, doorways, crates and other things to obstruct marine fire at long distances. All it looks like the creator of this map did was draw a few big squares in paint and connect them with zigzags...
I can see every game on this map being extremely similar, yet when I read news months ago about NS2, my idea of NS2 was playing on the same map could have a completely different feel to it every game, due to aspects like dynamic infestation. I'll put it like this for people who haven't noticed. THE MAP IS 100% SYMETRICAL. Is this game turning into StarCraft but your units are un-microable idiots who's aim you now rely on? NS1 had weird map shapes, yes maps had similarities (RT every hive room, one outside for each hive to claim as a 'natural', and two easily reachable from marine start), but the aliens could choose which side of the map they wanted to go for, and so could the marines.
This map makes it look like every round will be extremely similar. This is my guess to how it will play out anyway. Cap your half of the nodes on the map>take natural expansion>fight over third>winner wins. In NS1, the starting hive changed where all the key points on the map for each team are, eg. on ns_veil (http://hebus.aza.free.fr/ns_veil.jpg) sub hive means a phase gate at system way-pointing is a very aggressive move, but if their hive is pipe, its just a 'map control' phase gate. This map seems like the only fights will be an early skirmish deciding who caps double and who caps the bottom half of the map. On ns_veil, even if the aliens started in Cargo every game, aliens need a second hive, so they have to choose a side to focus on keeping safe safe therefore shaping the way the map will be played. Then there is marines getting to build a base where ever they want. Again reshaping the entire play-out of that round.
Also, the map size seems too small to me. Yes, it looks big in the screen shots, but the way I look at it is one elongated marine friendly zone room consumes most of the map other then the hives/MS.
================================================================================
tl;dr Dev's please tell us you're not listening to the stupid posters that plague your forums even though they probably barely played NS1 above a pub level.
I don't want to sound like someone who doesn't appreciate the developers work, as Natural Selection is my favourite game, and one of the only 2 games I actually enjoy repetitively playing.
My biggest concern about NS2 is I'm worried the developers actually put thought into most of the completely stupid and ridiculous ideas on the forums which are visible in nearly every thread. I mean, the ideas are so bad that they are around 90% of the reason I wasted so long typing up this post.
I do not like the direction of NS2, don't get me wrong I accept the fact it has to be different from NS1, I just think you are limiting the game and that the idea's on these forums will cause damage to the potential of NS2.
Below is what I think sucks about NS2.
================================================================================
I think your map is too small, linear, symmetrical and is imbalanced (at least in NS1 standards). The rooms are too open, there isn't any real cover visible, there isn't many spots for skulks to ambush, the vents are all in dumb places and again, its too small.
Look at the good maps in NS1 compared to the bad maps. The best ns_ map in my opinion is ns_veil. The distances between marine start, all resource nodes, and hives is perfect. There are heaps of rooms and hallways that shape the map between RT's. Then there is say, ns_machina. This map isn't too terrible with RT/Hive/MS distances, but the walls and rooms are TERRIBLE (nearly as bad as co_kestral's MS, which is just like your tram maps MS). Aliens need corners, pillars, doorways, crates and other things to obstruct marine fire at long distances. All it looks like the creator of this map did was draw a few big squares in paint and connect them with zigzags...
I can see every game on this map being extremely similar, yet when I read news months ago about NS2, my idea of NS2 was playing on the same map could have a completely different feel to it every game, due to aspects like dynamic infestation. I'll put it like this for people who haven't noticed. THE MAP IS 100% SYMETRICAL. Is this game turning into StarCraft but your units are un-microable idiots who's aim you now rely on? NS1 had weird map shapes, yes maps had similarities (RT every hive room, one outside for each hive to claim as a 'natural', and two easily reachable from marine start), but the aliens could choose which side of the map they wanted to go for, and so could the marines.
This map makes it look like every round will be extremely similar. This is my guess to how it will play out anyway. Cap your half of the nodes on the map>take natural expansion>fight over third>winner wins. In NS1, the starting hive changed where all the key points on the map for each team are, eg. on ns_veil (http://hebus.aza.free.fr/ns_veil.jpg) sub hive means a phase gate at system way-pointing is a very aggressive move, but if their hive is pipe, its just a 'map control' phase gate. This map seems like the only fights will be an early skirmish deciding who caps double and who caps the bottom half of the map. On ns_veil, even if the aliens started in Cargo every game, aliens need a second hive, so they have to choose a side to focus on keeping safe safe therefore shaping the way the map will be played. Then there is marines getting to build a base where ever they want. Again reshaping the entire play-out of that round.
Also, the map size seems too small to me. Yes, it looks big in the screen shots, but the way I look at it is one elongated marine friendly zone room consumes most of the map other then the hives/MS.
================================================================================
tl;dr Dev's please tell us you're not listening to the stupid posters that plague your forums even though they probably barely played NS1 above a pub level.
Comments
That said, I share your concern about similar/repetitive rounds but I'm not willing to declare all is lost until I see it in action. Repetitive strategies is the biggest threat to NS2's design. I want to see the powergrid system be this awesome thing that adds another layer of strategy, and I believe it would in NS1, but in NS2 the new linear maps leads me to think it will encourage the same movements/capturing of points/strategies every round.
Hopefully I'm wrong. We'll see when we get our hands on the beta.
its obvious that you have strong feelings about this and that you have taken the time to deliver them here and a coherent manner.
i would say that to worry to much about the details of a game this early in development however will not lead to a happy place.
it looks to me like tram is somewhat of a training map, or beginners welcome to NS2.
i'm sure that there will be other more complex/larger maps that will be favored by more competitive players.
perhaps the devs are encouraging a more 'combat' style of basic play for some maps and a more classic style for others... who knows??
no really..... who knows?
Wow way to go...
Slayer posted a very valid point of view that allready got mentioned a couple of times in the thread about ns2_tram, he certainly isn't alone with his opinion.
Feedback is feedback and his feedback had been rather constructive pointing out what he doesn't like and especially WHY he doesn't like it. Your post on the other side added nothing to the game, this forum, the discussion at hand or this community at all except delivering a very bad vibe of "elitism gone wrong".
While i disagree about the rooms beeing too alien unfriendly (hard to tell without actually seeing the map with all it's props and how aliens new abilities end up) i totaly agree that removing random starting hives and relocs while having such an linear map most likely will end up with some pretty repetive rounds.
Like allready mentioned it would be fine if the ns2_tram ends up as something like a "beginners map" that would make sense. But i still fear that removing random relocs for marines and random starting hives for aliens could end up hurting replayability to a big degree. Considering that capping tech points with CC's/Hives seems like a keyelement to gameplay i also don't see how this could be changed easily.
And let's hope that mappers come up with bigger more complex maps :D
<img src="http://4chanarchive.org/images/gif/3034866/1267671834001.gif" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Slayer posted a very valid point of view that allready got mentioned a couple of times in the thread about ns2_tram, he certainly isn't alone with his opinion.
Feedback is feedback and his feedback had been rather constructive pointing out what he doesn't like and especially WHY he doesn't like it. Your post on the other side added nothing to the game, this forum, the discussion at hand or this community at all except delivering a very bad vibe of "elitism gone wrong".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually Slayer started and ended his post with badmouthing a part of this community and most of the posted ideas.
Then his actual points have nothing to do with this.
He pretends to accept the decision that ns2 is going to be different than ns1, but then he makes references to ns1 in his reasoning.
Moreover he adresses a lot of things that have already been commented by devs like small maps or seemingly alien unfriendly enviroments.
The only point I agree is about possibly too linear gameplay due to the layout especially of the tech-points. While this might be true for this map and other layouts in the mapping guidelines, there are still maps we haven't seen yet.
Considering all that blah and attitude for this single, valid point, he shouldn't be surprised that some people don't take him seriously.
Very valid, skulks from ns2 are not the ns1 skulks, they have been changed on different levels that all appeal to me.
And I'dd like to add that some people LIKE small maps, such as myself, we like fast action, with co not being ingame small maps is what's left for us, so I'dd appreciate it if you stopped trying to remove em.
But anyway a couple more things I'd like to say:
- Small maps are for co_ and co_ killed NS. Or as quoted from someone else "maps too small. small maps are for co. co is for noobs. noobs are for NS2."
- Even though I kind of agree with the alien comm, the team diversity seems to have been nearly completely removed from NS2, might as well make it MvM. I think team diversity is what made NS1. Playing as a marine you could choose to rambo and not have to think, you could play to win as a marine and heat up your situational awareness and get into the game, or comm and put your all into it. Playing as an alien it's pretty much all instinct based as long as you know how to play whatever life-form you are (eg. any gorge knows to be building, healing or scouting). Don't misunderstand me, obviously playing as a skulk or a marine will be different like in NS1 but the symmetrical map is narrowing down the main differences between the teams, other then one uses teeth and the other uses lead.
Why should they listen to you if you tell them not to listen to "stupid" ideas on the forums?
Lets wait for alpha to see how the game actually plays, or god forbid, any of the community's ideas made it in.
A great reason to lock the thread and send this boy to jail. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.
Win!
Thread can be closed.
The map layout image is an example to show the process for map development. Already, from that first phase to what we have now, quite a lot has changed on the map, including some major routes, vent placement, etc. So, it's really not the best way to judge both the scale of the map as well as the gameplay on it.
Just because some of the screenshots may not have enough crates for cover does not mean anything. In some cases we moved/reduced crates to take the screenshot, as they would have been blocking the camera at the angle we took the shot at. All of that stuff is very quick and easy to place and move around based on what is needed for gameplay purposes.
Same goes for vents and vent placement. Again, using the layout to judge vent routes is not worth discussing, because it was just a first rough version of some general vents. But even so, vents are very easy to add/move/remove and can be done in the final alpha/beta phase based on playtesting.
We have multiple maps in development, with varying sizes and playstyles, and all of them will undergo rigorous playtesting and changes based on that playtesting.
--Cory
God, why did I read through this entire pathetic thread?
Slayar's tl;dr:
"OMG I hate UWE's new direction in NS2! Their tram map is awful and small and.. small maps are for noobie co players! I demand ONE mode for gameplay, and it's not combat! You're all stupid, full of stupid ideas and I have too much free time but I don't really care but I do! I know NS2 is going to be loads different from NS1 but this map looks like it would be boring in NS1..."
UWE have proven they can make pretty good games because they made NS1. NS1 has many flaws however which became more evident the more it was played, as is the case with many games, the main direction NS2 seems to be going in is the one which tries to correct the problems with NS1, as well as improving on the themes behind it.
In short, a good solid approach for a sequel, by a team who obviously knows what they're doing and has some really good people on it, as evidenced by what has already been achieved; the creation of some great art and a complete game engine from scratch.
Just a little something thought it was a nice read.
The sad truth is that we cant truly tell whether if the game/map/mechanic is working well until we get to play it. I think the points of opener are very valid, I too have doubts about the way game is heading and I believe it is foolish to believe the game will be good just because ns1 was good.
Point being listen top competitive teams thank you.
Made me think of this:
<img src="http://www.freewebz.com/brotrr/bigrigs-winner.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
<img src="http://www.freewebz.com/brotrr/bigrigs-winner.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" /><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Was that the most buggiest game ever invented?
Yeah, that was Savage 2. And they waited too long to listen to their community (mind you, when they did it managed to salvage the game somewhat). The "don't listen to your community" bit is absolute bullcrud - they are the ones playing the game.
TrC has the correct attitude. Listen to your community, heed the advice of experienced players, and make an informed decision after playtest results.
The core issue is this:
NS2 will be an improvement over the original. The only people who would disagree are those who believe that NS2 should only be a reproduction, or those that think they know the "feel" of Natural Selection better than UWE.
Time is the problem.
When NS1 came out, it was being benchmarked against multiplayer games like Counter-Strike and Halo. TeamFortress2 had not even released yet. The state of the modern first person shooter -- and what the average gamer expects of a good game -- has risen considerably since then. Boot up the original NS if you don't believe me. It's not Commander Keen, but the slippery feel of player movement, the impossible-to-follow player animations, and the utter disconnection from the win condition in public online play are certainly dated. For a comparison of how a modern shooter looks, I would draw comparisons to the multiplayer "versus" mode in Left 4 Dead and "Titan" mode in Battlefield 2142.
A combination of the two games mentioned above may be the most accurate way to describe Natural Selection's gameplay to an outsider, though this forum is filled with people who hated one or both of them. This group has taken to calling themselves the "community," and seem to have taken on a personal quest of writing vitriolic statements about how UWE has "sold out" or "turned pop."
For myself, I'd be perfectly happy if UWE threw away everything but the art of the original game before starting NS2. Asymmetrical shooters are rare (L4D and Singularity are the only two that come to mind). I'd be excited if NS2 was nothing more than a strategic AFPS with a familiar face.